To the Editor of the Lyttelton Times. Sik, —The claims put forward by the Committee appointed at the meeting of Stockowners on the 16th ult., are too important to be allowed, to pass unchallenged and unconsidered by the public : for they might then be conceded through inadvertence, as if altogether well founded. The first, I observe, is that the occupier of a run, while continuing to pay rent, should be guaranteed possession against all but purchasers or holders of pre-emptive rights. The second, asserts broadly and unhesitatingly in addition, that there should be secured to him a right of pre-emption. The consequences of admitting conjointly, and to their fullest extent, these two claims would he little else than, for a present rental far below what the runs in a very few years will be worth, to grant a lease of them in perpetuity,—and, further, (by precluding competition) to place it beyond the power of the Public ever to ascertain the proper return it should derive from its property. The third claim advanced, a "yearly tenure," with an " understanding" such as the Committee contemplate, is merely a repetition of the first two in another form. *To concede it would amount simply to an entire surrender of the waste Lands, and of all controul over them, to those who happen to be the first occupiers,—for a consideration (it is true) ; but who would be bold enough to maintain that ten years hence that consideration would be a valuable one, or an equivalent for the privileges so obtained ? The question of giving " guarantees" for the possession of land, for however short a time, cannot be approached with too much caution or too much consideration for the prospective interests of the Public; and, in deciding on the rental, it is quite necessary to assume that this Settlement must progress rapidly. - The wool growers,—while arguing for more favourable terms of occupancy on the ground that the exceptional circumstances, in which the events of the past year have placed this and the adjoining Colonies, have overthrown all their calculations, —forget to admit that, if the discovery of Gold has made labour scarce and increased their outlay, it has also caused the enormous rise in the price of wool of 4d. per lb., —a rise more than sufficient, surely, to cover all errors of calculation. Besides, if the difficulty of introducing stock has increased, it has ' per contra' incalculably diminished to actual occupants the risk of being outbid for runs at the end of their present term ; it has, moreover, added to the value of the carcase for slaughter, as well as to that of the young stock for sale generally. But even if, as is highly probable, the effect of the Gold discoveries will operate to the disadvantage^ o^-lbe squatters here for one or two years (wlii'dii'is the utmost to be expected), it is not reasonable in them to claim ou that ground the extension of their seven j rears lease to just double the time. At least, let them first recast their calculations, and give us some grounds on which to re-consider their case. To assert roundly that " any system of selling Waste Lands" which does not secure the squatter his right of pre-emption, is rt unjust," shows no little boldness, regard being had to the circumstances under which it is made. The " system" (which I would not, however, be understood here to advocate) was one virtually assented to by those who ventured to risk their fortunes under it: its details were made sufficiently public for any man to learn them who wished to do so. The stock-owners were free agents ; if they did not like it, why did they come under it ? their acquiescence in the " system" was freely given ; at any rate, they expected to profit by it, and they have no right now to complain of "injustice" done to them by it. As regards the first body of Colonists, for this as well as most of the hardships they complain of, let them thank their own want of circumspection in not thoroughly mastering the very defective " minute of the 24th May," and in not demanding a less ambiguous guarantee before sailing, that if found to work badly, the system shoufd be altered as soon as they themselves might consider it necessary. There is no reason to believe that Agriculture, of itself, will be a more profitable pursuit in this than it has proved in other Settlements—at least while labour remains at present prices. For any but "peasant-proprietors- to
be successful, it must be carried on in combination with the rearing of sheep and cattle. It is not desirable that Canterbury should remain one vast sheep-walk, or that the pastoral should be fostered by the discouragement of the Agricultural interests. Our aim should be to advance both equally and fairly. But if an intending purchaser of land is to be confined wholly to farming operations, without being able to obtain the use of even one acre of the adjoining pasturage, because it is already all held by one set of occupants, you not only take away inducements to purchase land at all—but, you positively yield it up (as I have shewn before) to the present occupant for no more than a nominal rental. The Public or those who act for them, stand in the position of a Landlord, and are entitled to name their own terms. There is no doubt but that they should derive not merely a revenue from the Waste Lands, but the fullest revenue that can be raised consistently with profitable occupation by individuals. What these latter can fairly and reasonably afford to pay, is what the Public are entitled to demand and to receive ; and a system which, after a term of years, enables us by competition to arrive at the real value of runs, is clearly one that will best protect the interests of the Public, assist in lessening the burden of taxation to individuals, and, by destroying unfair monopoly, ensure general efforts to improve both the quality and quantity of the pasturage in a country where the cultivation of artificial grasses has proved highly successful when attempted. As an old "New Zealand colonist, I am fully sensible of the vast importance of rendering all legitimate assistance to the development of our pastoral resources: —but nevertheless, I advance these opinions, because the stockowners have hitherto had all the talk to themselves, and there is some danger of its being forgotten that the Public has an interest in the W 7aste Lands, an interest which is distinct from that of the Stock-owners, and which they would be very glad, perhaps, to ignore. If the Committee in drawing up their Report had before their minds the easy terms under which, for a space of fourteen years, the last Council were willing to sacrifice the interests of the colony at large, it is fully time that attention should be awakened to some defects of the Regulations of last Session. Of these, not the least note-worthy is the one which, —in the early days of a Colony, when real property is ever changing from a low and uncertain to a higher and easily ascertainable value—grants for a nominal rental at present value, long lear.es of pasture which every one, who has faith at all in the future of tins Settlement is well aware will, before half the term of the leases expires, have doubled and trebled in value to its proprietors, the public, and equally so, let it be remembered, to their tenants, the stockowners. 1 amas Sr r ' V ours very obediently, %
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LT18521016.2.9.1
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Lyttelton Times, Volume II, Issue 93, 16 October 1852, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,271Untitled Lyttelton Times, Volume II, Issue 93, 16 October 1852, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.